Measuring a Critical Component of Contraceptive Decision Making: The Contraceptive Concerns and Beliefs Scale.

INTRODUCTION: Concerns about safety and side effects from contraceptives are widespread and related to reluctance to use them. Measuring these concerns is an essential component of understanding contraceptive decision-making and guiding contraceptive and interpregnancy clinical care. METHODS: We used qualitative research and item response theory to develop and test a psychometric instrument to measure contraceptive concerns and beliefs. We developed 55 candidate scale items and tested them among 572 adolescents and adults across nine California healthcare facilities in 2019-2020. We derived a 6-item scale and assessed differences by age and social determinants of health with multivariable regression. RESULTS: In qualitative data, participants voiced both concerns and positive beliefs about contraception. Quantitative survey respondents were aged 21 years on average, and 24% were parous. Over half (54%) worried contraception has dangerous side effects, and 39% worried it is unnatural. The mean Contraceptive Concerns score, increasing with higher concerns, was 1.85 (SD: 1.00, range 0-4, α = 0.81). Items fit a partial credit item response model and met prespecified criteria for internal structure validity. Contraceptive use declined with increasing Concerns score (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] = 0.81 [0.72-0.92]). Scores were elevated among Black (mean: 2.06; aß = 0.34 [0.09, 0.59]) and Multiracial or other race (2.11; aß = 0.34 [0.02, 0.66]) respondents vs. White (1.66), but not Latinx respondents (1.81; aß = 0.11 [- 0.11, 0.33]). Scores were also elevated among participants with lower maternal education (high school/Associate's 1.89 versus college 1.60; aß = 0.28 [0.04, 0.53]). DISCUSSION: The psychometrically robust Concerns instrument can be used in research to measure autonomous contraceptive decision-making and to design person-centered care.

Prehospital Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder by Paramedics: First Year Results of the EMS Buprenorphine Use Pilot.

BACKGROUND: Prehospital initiation of buprenorphine treatment for Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) by paramedics is an emerging potential intervention to reach patients at greatest risk for opioid-related death. Emergency medical services (EMS) patients who are at high risk for overdose deaths may never engage in treatment as they frequently refuse transport to the hospital after naloxone reversal. The potentially important role of EMS as the initiator for medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in the most high-risk patients has not been well described. SETTING: This project relies on four interventions: a public access naloxone distribution program, an electronic trigger and data sharing program, an "Overdose Receiving Center," and a paramedic-initiated buprenorphine treatment. For the final intervention, paramedics followed a protocol-based pilot that had an EMS physician consultation prior to administration. RESULTS: There were 36 patients enrolled in the trial study in the first year who received buprenorphine. Of those patients receiving buprenorphine, only one patient signed out against medical advice on scene. All other patients were transported to an emergency department and their clinical outcome and 7 and 30 day follow ups were determined by the substance use navigator (SUN). Thirty-six of 36 patients had follow up data obtained in the short term and none experienced any precipitated withdrawal or other adverse outcomes. Patients had a 50% (18/36) rate of treatment retention at 7 days and 36% (14/36) were in treatment at 30 days. CONCLUSION: In this small pilot project, paramedic-initiated buprenorphine in the setting of data sharing and linkage with treatment appears to be a safe intervention with a high rate of ongoing outpatient treatment for risk of fatal opioid overdoses.

Prehospital Initiation of Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder by Paramedics.

Prehospital initiation of buprenorphine treatment for Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) by paramedics is an emerging potential intervention. Many patients who may be at high risk for overdose deaths may never engage in treatment because they frequently refuse transport. Recent data have demonstrated a significant increase in both short and long term mortality following an opioid overdose. We describe 3 preliminary cases with a novel intervention of initiating Buprenorphine in the prehospital setting for symptoms of opioid withdrawal, regardless of etiology. In addition, we describe tracking of long term engagement in additional services as part of an integrated approach to combatting the opioid epidemic through EMS focused interventions.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 and Respiratory Virus Sentinel Surveillance, California, USA, May 10, 2020-June 12, 2021.

State and local health departments established the California Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and Respiratory Virus Sentinel Surveillance System to conduct enhanced surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory pathogens at sentinel outpatient testing sites in 10 counties throughout California, USA. We describe results obtained during May 10, 2020‒June 12, 2021, and compare persons with positive and negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR results by using Poisson regression. We detected SARS-CoV-2 in 1,696 (19.6%) of 8,662 specimens. Among 7,851 specimens tested by respiratory panel, rhinovirus/enterovirus was detected in 906 (11.5%) specimens and other respiratory pathogens in 136 (1.7%) specimens. We also detected 23 co-infections with SARS-CoV-2 and another pathogen. SARS-CoV-2 positivity was associated with male participants, an age of 35-49 years, Latino race/ethnicity, obesity, and work in transportation occupations. Sentinel surveillance can provide useful virologic and epidemiologic data to supplement other disease monitoring activities and might become increasingly useful as routine testing decreases.

Overdose Receiving Centers - An Idea Whose Time Has Come?

Drug overdose deaths have been the leading cause of accidental death in the United States with two thirds involving opioids. Strong evidence supports the efficacy of medications for addiction treatment such as buprenorphine and harm reduction strategies such as naloxone distribution. While emergency medical service (EMS) systems have defined specialty centers for the treatment of many significant life threatening disease (trauma, stroke, myocardial infarction) implementation of opioid use disorder systems of care that integrate EMS are uncommon. As fentanyl drives the third wave of the opioid epidemic, EMS systems are uniquely positioned to direct patients to hospitals that can provide the best care for patients with Opiate Use Disorder (OUD.) Emergency Departments which have established systems for early intervention and treatment for patients with opioid use disorders have shown higher engagement in treatment programs. This, in turn, leads to lower mortality. EMS systems which designate specialty centers for overdose patients may show a public health mortality benefit.

Crisis Decision-Making at the Speed of COVID-19: Field Report on Issuing the First Regional Shelter-in-Place Orders in the United States.

CONTEXT: In March, 2020, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causal agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), was spreading in the Bay Area, especially in Santa Clara County, causing increases in cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. PROGRAM: The Association of Bay Area Health Officials (ABAHO) represents 13 Bay Area health jurisdictions. IMPLEMENTATION: On March 15, 2020, the local health officers of 7 ABAHO members (counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara and the city of Berkeley) decided to issue legal orders on March 16 for 6.7 million residents to shelter in place to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the causal agent of COVID-19. The Bay Area was the first region in the United States to shelter in place, and within days, other regions in the United States followed. EVALUATION: Subsequent comparative analyses have confirmed that acting early in issuing shelter-in-place orders prevented a large number of cases, hospitalizations, and deaths in the Bay Area throughout the United States. The quality of a decision-in this case, for crisis decision making-cannot be judged by the outcome. A good decision can have a bad outcome, and a bad decision can have a good outcome. The quality of a decision depends only on the quality of the decision-making process at the time the decision was made. DISCUSSION: In this Field Report, we review how we made this collective decision. With the benefit of hindsight and reflection, we recount our story through the lens of public health legal authority, meta-leadership, and decision intelligence. Our purpose is to improve the crisis decision-making skills of public health officials by improving how we make high-stakes decisions each day in our continuing fight to contain the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, to save lives, and to eliminate COVID-19 racial/ethnic inequities.